This is an archive of past discussions with User:Jj137. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Just a quick note... When adding a game log template to an article, don't use "subst". This causes the game log to be edited in two separate places, which can be confusing. Let me know if you have any questions. Caknuck (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, after reading that more closely, I'd say only a few editors (but no worries). I'm trying to keep all of the game logs currently editable on the articles until their completion, when they can be moved into a template. However, this is only for the newer templates we create since that discussion; the game log templates created before that, completely or not, can stay where they are. Tell me what you think. (It seems to be easier to simply edit them there instead of going back and forth between the article and the template. That makes it confusing.) jj137♠Talk20:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I was hoping there was another discussion, because there is no way to interpret a clear consensus from that thread. Four editors (myself, User:Steven Andrew Miller, User:Wknight94 and User:X96lee15) sided with separate transcluded templates and three (User:Borgarde, User:Soxrock and yourself) supported subst'ing them into the article. How do you get consensus out of that?
As far as leaving the templates separate during the season, this is how we did it last year and I heard no complaints. Why fix it if it ain't broke?
Now you have a situation where two separate game logs (like with the 2008 Astros) exist in different stages of completion. I think this was a poor decision with poor implementation. Caknuck (talk) 23:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I have also been thinking about a Red Sox Project newsletter. I could coordinate it if you would like me to. Please give imput, I look forward to hearing from you. STORMTRACKER9415:06, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
That sounds great. I'll give you a few ideas I had and see what you think:
I would prefer weekly over monthly. It doesn't have to be anything big or amazing each week, but some content people would be interested in.
We could create a subpage (probably Wikipedia:WikiProject Boston Red Sox/Newsletter) where people can place their name if they would like to receive the newsletter each week. Each individual newsletter would be in a subpage of that, I guess.
Since it is the offseason, there isn't much to write about. We could just have a few "featured articles" (no, not the featured articles, but some interesting articles.)
We could deliver it each Sunday. That will give us a week to write the first one, should we start today.
To tell you the truth, that's insanely awesome. I'm not very good with that sort of thing (the formatting, etc.) but I think that's a lot better style than some other WikiProject newsletter templates I've seen. Well done. jj137♠Talk20:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
One more thing- How should we decide what the "featured" articles are? Should we vote or should the writers decide? Also, I'm going to get started on a free agent summary for the Red Sox as part of the newsletter. STORMTRACKER9420:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
You can come up with ones yourself. If people suggest articles, we should probably use those too. We probably wouldn't be able to actually write an article about an article (well, maybe, anything is possible), but we can list a few on the template (or something along those lines). jj137♠Talk20:27, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Two other things I've thought of. We could have some sort of template to place on each newsletter page (or most of them) for easier navigation. Also, keep in mind this isn't being published until next Sunday, so be careful with past tense, time usage, etc. jj137♠Talk04:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Red Sox Subpage
I love it. I saw Stormtrackers post about a newsletter (saw, not read). If you look at my user page, you'll see a bunch of MLB off season updates. Check em out! --HPJoker (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Those are cool. We now have a section on the main page saying all of the recent Sox deals (although there's only a few). I suggested the idea of a newsletter yesterday at WT:BOSOX, and Stormtracker already seems up for the idea. Hopefully it will work out. jj137♠Talk20:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm wondering how to link something on my user page to another section of a wikipedia page. I think it's something like when you asked me have I ever made this edit before. Thanx! --HPJoker (talk) 01:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Or, I think this is what you mean. If you wanted to link to a revision you made, you would use it as an external link: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jj137&diff=177346048&oldid=177102832 like this], which comes out as like this. See? jj137♠Talk02:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Also, as a side note, try to stay NPOV when writing these articles. I mean, I think we're all Sox fans, so there's nothing wrong with saying good things about them, etc. but try not to stay stuff like "I heard today" and stuff like that. Other than that, good job so far. jj137♠Talk03:32, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Better?
ALSO! I significantly expanded KRST, a station in New Mexico I used to live near by and now don't, but I still listen online. I feel proud. --HPJoker (talk) 04:04, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
About the newsletter - it's mainly a time-based thing, because when it gets delivered, a thing you heard yesterday would have been 5 days ago by then. jj137♠Talk21:08, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
No, I'm American. I know at one point the cat "Wikipedians in Brazil" was on my user talk page, but I really have no idea how. It was very random. jj137♠Talk03:17, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
The December 2007 issue of the College football WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
MLB Newsletter
I heard something about a MLB Newsletter. Is there such a thing and if there is can I do that with the stuff on my user page? --HPJoker (talk) 03:58, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
There's not an MLB newsletter, and I'm not really sure I know what you mean with that anyway. You're going to have to ask a sysop about the phone number thing, because I haven't seen that on any other article, but have never heard any discussion about it. jj137♠Talk20:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Thank you for voting in my RfA, which passed with 24 support, 3 oppose, and 3 neutral. I promise to work my hardest to improve the Wiki with my new tools.
I've begun work on it. Also, I've created a banner we can put on any newsletter pages. Just place {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Boston Red Sox/Newsletter/Header}} on the top of any newsletter pages. jj137♠Talk01:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
You really have put a ton of effort into your userpage. I went through the list and added some players I missed (I used a list from Baseball-Reference that I think was missing six players.) Thanks jj137♠Talk03:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Current consensus is that notices on user talk pages can be removed by the user, with us assuming they have read the notice and to not repost it. —Kurykh04:44, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
I really won't be very active this week (just see the template on my page...), but I think that some articles about the Mitchell Report aftermath (e.g. Roger Clements) and the usual project news would be good. STORMTRACKER9422:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
That's too bad. I reminded HPJoker as well, and I already started on the news page, so I think we're fine. jj137♠22:13, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Two words: Heck no. Ever since the Mitchell Report came out, not much has happened, and nothing on Santana. The Rockies I think are trying to get a new second baseman, Brian Giles after Kaz Matsui left the Rockies and joined the Astros. --HPJoker (talk) 22:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
You could write something about Roger Clemens denying steroid use, because he played with the Red Sox for a while. jj137♠22:44, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
That looks like something very interesting (and important) you could write about. The only reason I thought of the Clemens thing, and Stormtracker mentioned it, was because shortly before Andy Pettitte announced using HGH (and Clemens made somewhat big news). jj137♠23:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok. I kind of doubt that the ball really got ate by his dog. First, he tries to keep it secret, then he says his dog ate it. Can I wikify a link to another webpage? --HPJoker (talk) 23:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I kind of believe it. I mean, I thought he was probably just embarrassed by one of the probably most important artifacts in Red Sox history being destroyed by his dog. And sure, if you want to add a link to another page you can; if you want to add an in-text citation to the web address place <ref>(URL)</ref> and then place a section "References" at the bottom with {{Reflist}}. Or, of course, you could just do it in this form: [1]. jj137♠02:14, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Johan Santana
I just talked to ESPN MLB writer Jerry Crasnick and he says the Santana deal might as well be dead. Bill Smith has not been shocked by any of the deals from the Red Sox or Yankees and will probably keep Santana for the beginning of 2008 and might look to trade him in July. --HPJoker (talk) 17:40, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Possibly. Stormtracker won't be able to write this week (see template on his userpage), so I'll work something out. jj137♠01:21, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Darn. I wonder how he got grounded. What did you have in mind. It looks like the Red Sox probably won't make many free agency moves for a while. They got their main targets (Lowell, Schilling) signed. --HPJoker (talk) 02:58, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
I don't think so. If you see anything else that needs fixing, or would like to create a new article for the newsletter, go right ahead. jj137♠03:53, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I am back on and am editing in full swing, so I will be able to deliver the newsletter tommorow. I apologize for not being active this week and hope to start writing soon! STORMTRACKER9416:10, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
That's great! I wrote a couple articles yesterday, so feel free to see them, comment on them, or do whatever with them. Also: you might think this is funny or not. [4]. jj137♠16:12, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations on your successful request for adminship. I am glad you passed, and you are welcome for the support. For information on using your new tools, see the school for new admins; you will find it very useful. Good luck! Acalamari02:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I couldn't write in the newsletter. There was nothing going on with the Sox. The ball and thats it. Thank you so much for writing all of the newsletter this week. I hope something happens (something non santana) with the Sox.
Regarding your message [5], please look at my complaints about this particular user using multiple ips from the same domain and long-term vandalizing India-related articles[6][7][8]. Can anything pro-active be done to curb this, like sprotect the affected articles? I filed an RFPP but it got turned down.Ghanadar galpa (talk) 23:32, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Unfortunately, this person seems to have a frequently changing IP address, and there is nothing we can do about that except block them. jj137♠23:34, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
In response to [9], is it possible to sprotect the affected articles for while? At least, until he gets bored and runs off? The primary affected articles are:
I protected the first three articles you said and the last one for vandalism; the fourth one I don't think had enough recent vandalism to justify protection. If vandalism keeps up on any of those articles, let me know and I'll take care of it. jj137♠23:41, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
I do not have much knowledge of Pakistan and that article, but I was just trying to stop the edit wars. And no, Maxim and Ghanadar galpa are not vandals, they are just trying to keep the article neutral. jj137♠17:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, sometimes I leave it, but sometimes I will change it to one line of white space, simply because (in some cases) I think it looks slightly better without a lot of white space. It all depends what all is around the tag. jj137♠23:37, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
User:Mark753's socks
I have a feeling that I will be doing this all night, so I need to ask if it is possible to protect the talk page of all his other socks? Rgoodermote00:53, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I have my doubts that the user will not use those user names, but as long as he is limited to using them it should make lives easier in the future and yeah to my knowledge all of the socks used by Mark should be there but a checkuser will probably be necessary some time in the future as a lot of his statements were threatening his usage of other accounts. By the way I will respond tomorrow afternoon as it is to late for me to stay online. Rgoodermote01:12, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Speak of the devil I already tried WP:RFPP but they have done nothing User:Sockerwocker has used talk page to attack users earlier this day as seen here. Though it seems as the edit was not recent they seem to be reluctant to protect the page. But after last night there is a fairly good chance that the sock will be used again in an attempt to bait the attacked users into responding. The guy has not learned no matter what he does some one simply delete the edit and report it. Rgoodermote21:16, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, sorry if I have been a pest and seemingly attached to mark's case (need to slow down my response time). Rgoodermote
It isn't a problem; this guy needs to quit trolling. Also, don't worry, I don't think your response time is too quick. If it is, then probably all of my response times are too quick as well. jj137♠21:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I have my doubts he will ever stop trolling. Lol, I tend to feel really odd when I get the same person over and over again, well it comes with the territory. Good Night, I'm taking off for the night to enjoy my vacation. Happy Holidays. Rgoodermote21:32, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
There have only been ~3 vandal edits the entire month, not nearly enough to be protected. And don't worry, it isn't really a mistake, because it depends on the situation of how much vandalism. The point is, if there has been plenty of vandalism recently on an article, don't hesitate to report it. You won't get in trouble if it is declined. jj137♠01:41, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I only deleted it because there was an expired prod tag on it. The original concern cited by Dlohcierekim was that it did not establish notability. jj137♠18:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I only deleted it because there was an expired prod tag on it. The original concern cited by Dlohcierekim was that it did not establish notability. jj137♠18:34, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Since that tag I had added significant changes, references, and sources for the article. I also left two posts requesting feedback on the talk page. Of which I received no responses. rkmlai (talk) 18:42, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I undeleted it and the talk page, because you did expand the article and it shouldn't have been deleted. jj137♠18:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, rkmlai (talk) 18:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC) btw how do you have the ability to post here and on the other editor page simultaniously ? I find it way cool
I just reply here and then copy and paste my comments to my own talk page. That way any conversations I have don't get completely separated in two places and become very confusing. jj137♠18:52, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Fraudulent requests for page protection and vandalism to Bobby Farrell.
Please be advised that the page you protected is being vandalized by user [Jvhertum], who made the fraudulent request stating that someone tampered with the article, when in fact it is he/she who deleted a video-confession which clearly spells out the fact in question at the 2-minute mark of the video. To delete a verifiable fact from Wikipedia is considered vandalism. This is precisely what the user keeps doing, because he perhaps does wish to have this information revealed. Regardless what the motives are, such actions constitute fraud and vandalism. USRepublican (talk) 20:59, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
USRepublican, do you speak Dutch? If not, then you are hardly in a position to judge what Farrell does or does not say in that YouTube video. People should not be labeled as male prostitutes on Wikipedia without some clear evidence for this, hence my request for page protection. I do not appreciate these silly accusations of vandalism. Jvhertum (talk) 21:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, but I have no idea what that means. Jj137, could you please look again at the article? The label "A video confession where Bobby Farrell admits to having worked as gay-for-pay" is anything but neutral. A more neutral label would be "Interview with Bobby Farrell". Alternatively, remove the link altogether as the YouTube clip surely has been placed there without permission from the TV station that broadcast it as is therefore a copyright violation. Best regards, Jvhertum (talk) 22:46, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
I changed the external link to "Interview with Bobby Farrell" like you said; if the video gets deleted from the site for copyvio concerns then we can remove it all together. jj137♠23:11, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
